and that, the covenant of circumcision, was given with thirteen covenants, as the word brit, covenant, appears thirteen times in the portion dealing with the circumcision of Abraham (Genesis 17:1–14).

Rabbi Abba says: One must mention thanks in the blessing of thanksgiving in Grace after Meals at the beginning and the end of the blessing. And one who decreases the number of expressions of thanksgiving may not decrease their number to fewer than one, and if anyone decreases their number to fewer than one, it is reprehensible.

The Gemara added that the conclusions of the blessing of the land and the blessing: Who builds Jerusalem, may also not be changed. Anyone who concludes the blessing of the land: Who bequeaths lands and concludes the blessing: Who builds Jerusalem, with the formula: Who redeems Israel, is an ignoramus, as he thereby corrupts the intention of the blessing. And anyone who does not mention covenant and Torah in the blessing of the land and the royal house of David in the blessing: Who builds Jerusalem, did not fulfill his obligation.

The Gemara notes: This baraita supports the opinion of Rabbi Il’a, as Rabbi Il’a said that Rabbi Ya’akov bar Aḥa said in the name of Rabbeinu, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: Anyone who did not mention covenant and Torah in the blessing of the land and the royal house of David in the blessing: Who builds Jerusalem, did not fulfill his obligation.

Abba Yosei ben Dostai and the Rabbis disagreed whether or not God’s sovereignty must be invoked in the blessing: Who is good and does good. One said: Who is good and does good, requires mention of God’s sovereignty, and one said: It does not require mention of God’s sovereignty. The Gemara explains: The one who said that it requires mention of God’s sovereignty holds that this blessing was instituted by the Sages, so it is not a continuation of the previous blessings. As an independent blessing, God’s sovereignty must be mentioned. The one who said that it does not require mention of God’s sovereignty holds that the obligation to recite this blessing is by Torah law. Therefore, it is a continuation of the previous blessings.

The Sages taught in a baraita: With what formula does he conclude the third blessing of Grace after Meals, which discusses the building of Jerusalem? Rabbi Yosei son of Rabbi Yehuda says: He concludes it with: Who redeems Israel. This is perplexing: Is that to say that with: Who redeems Israel, yes, he concludes the blessing; with: The building of Jerusalem, no, he does not conclude the blessing? The Gemara responds: Rather, say that Rabbi Yosei son of Rabbi Yehuda said the following: One who recites the blessing concludes either with: The building of Jerusalem, or even with: Who redeems Israel.

The Gemara recounts: Rabba bar Rav Huna happened to come to the house of the Exilarch. While reciting the blessing: Who builds Jerusalem in Grace after Meals, he opened with one theme: Have compassion on Jerusalem, and concluded with two themes: Both the building of Jerusalem and Who redeems Israel. Rav Ḥisda said derisively: It takes great fortitude to conclude with two themes. How could you conclude with two themes? Wasn’t it taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: One may not conclude with two themes? Each blessing has its own particular ending.

The Gemara discusses the matter itself: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: One may not conclude with two themes. Levi, his student, raised an objection to the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi based on the standard conclusions of various blessings. The second blessing of Grace after Meals concludes: For the land and for the food. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi explained that the conclusion to that blessing is actually a single theme: The land that produces food. Levi raised a similar objection from the blessing that concludes: For the land and for the fruit. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi explained that there, too, it means: The land that produces fruit.

Levi cited two other blessings: Who sanctifies Israel and the seasons. It means: Who sanctifies Israel, who sanctify the seasons. Who sanctifies Israel and the New Moon. It means: Who sanctifies Israel, who sanctify the New Moons.

Levi cited an additional blessing that concludes with two themes, the blessing recited when Shabbat coincides with a Festival: Who sanctifies Shabbat, Israel, and the seasons. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi answered: Except for that one.

The Gemara asks: What is different about this blessing? The Gemara answers: Here, the blessing thanks God for one matter, the sanctity of the day. However, there, in the conclusion of the third blessing of Grace after Meals, the building of Jerusalem and redemption of Israel are two themes, and each one is distinct from the other.

The Gemara asks: And what is the reason that one does not conclude a blessing with two themes? The Gemara responds: Because there is a general principle: One does not perform mitzvot in bundles; rather, each mitzva must have its own blessing.

The Gemara has yet to arrive at a clear conclusion regarding the conclusion of the third blessing of Grace after Meals. The Gemara asks: What conclusion was reached about it?

Rav Sheshet said: If he opened with: Have compassion on Your people, Israel, mentioning redemption of Israel at the start, he concludes with: Who redeems Israel; if he opened with: Have compassion on Jerusalem, he concludes with: Who builds Jerusalem. Rav Naḥman said: Even if he opened with: Have compassion on Israel, he concludes with: Who builds Jerusalem, because it is stated: “The Lord builds Jerusalem; He gathers in the exiles of Israel” (Psalms 147:2). This verse is interpreted to mean: When does God build Jerusalem? When He gathers in the exiles of Israel. The rebuilding of Jerusalem symbolizes Israel’s redemption.

On a similar topic, the Gemara relates: Rabbi Zeira said to Rav Ḥisda: Let the Master come and teach Mishna. He responded: I have not yet learned Grace after Meals, and I will teach Mishna? He responded: What is this? Why do you say that you have not yet learned Grace after Meals? He said to him: I happened to come to the house of the Exilarch and recited Grace after Meals, and Rav Sheshet stiffened his neck over me like a snake, i.e., he got angry and challenged me. Rabbi Zeira asked: And why did Rav Sheshet become angry with you? He answered: I did not mention covenant, Torah, or sovereignty in Grace after Meals. Rabbi Zeira wondered: And why did you not mention those themes? He answered that he did so in accordance with the opinion that Rav Ḥananel said that Rav said, as Rav Ḥananel said that Rav said: If one does not mention covenant, Torah or sovereignty in Grace after Meals, he nevertheless fulfilled his obligation because these themes are not applicable to all of Israel. Covenant does not apply to women; Torah and sovereignty apply neither to women nor to slaves. Rabbi Zeira said to him: Rav Sheshet should have been angry with you. And you abandoned all of these tanna’im and amora’im who disagree with him, and followed Rav? Evidently, many tanna’im and amora’im hold that covenant, Torah, and sovereignty must be mentioned in the second blessing of Grace after Meals.

Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The blessing: Who is good and does good, requires mention of God’s sovereignty. The Gemara asks: What is he teaching us that we did not already know? If you say that he is teaching us that any blessing that does not contain mention of God’s sovereignty is not considered a blessing, didn’t Rabbi Yoḥanan already say that halakha once? Rabbi Zeira said: Rabba bar bar Ḥana is saying that the blessing: Who is good and does good, requires two mentions of sovereignty, one for itself and one for the blessing: Who builds Jerusalem.

The Gemara asks: If so, that God’s sovereignty must be mentioned a second time in the blessing: Who is good and does good, to compensate for the fact that it was not mentioned in the blessing: Who builds Jerusalem, it should require three mentions; one of its own, one for the blessing: Who builds Jerusalem, and one for the blessing of the land, in which sovereignty is also not mentioned. Rather, in the blessing of the land, what is the reason that sovereignty is not mentioned? Because it is a blessing juxtaposed to another preceding blessing. Who builds Jerusalem, should also not require its own mention of God’s sovereignty, as it is a blessing juxtaposed to another preceding blessing.

The Gemara responds: The same is true even with regard to the blessing: Who builds Jerusalem, that it does not require mention of sovereignty. However, since he mentioned the royal house of David in the blessing, it would not be proper if he did not mention God’s sovereignty as well. On the other hand, Rav Pappa said: The blessing: Who is good and does good, requires two mentions of sovereignty besides its own; one to compensate for its lack of mention in the blessing: Who builds Jerusalem, and one for the blessing of the land.

The Gemara recounts: Rabbi Zeira sat behind Rav Giddel in the study hall, and Rav Giddel sat before Rav Huna, and he sat and he said: One who erred and did not mention the formula for Shabbat in Grace after Meals, says the following abridged version instead: Blessed…Who gave Shabbatot for rest to His people Israel with love, as a sign and a covenant; Blessed…Who sanctifies the Shabbat. Rav Huna said to him: Who said this halakha? He answered: Rav.

Again Rav Giddel sat and said: One who erred and did not mention the formula for Festivals in Grace after Meals, says: “Blessed…Who gave Festivals to His people Israel for joy and for commemoration; Blessed…Who sanctifies Israel and the seasons.” Rav Huna said to him: Who said this halakha? He answered: Rav.

Again Rav Giddel sat and said: If one erred and did not mention the New Moon, he says: “Blessed…Who gave the New Moon to His people Israel for commemoration. Rabbi Zeira, who related this incident, said: I do not know whether he mentioned joy in the formula or whether he did not mention joy, whether he concluded this formula with a blessing as he did in the parallel formulas for Shabbat and Festivals or if he did not conclude it with a blessing; and whether this halakha is his or whether it is his teacher Rav’s statement.

The Gemara relates: Giddel bar Manyumi was standing before Rav Naḥman, Rav Naḥman erred and did not mention the special formula for Shabbat in Grace after Meals,